The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1887-11-10
A COUNTRY LAWYER.
How He Convinced the Court That the
Law Of e Pluribus Unum Fitted
the Case.
Ne,edrE Journal.

Some twenty-five or thirty years
ago, there lived in Iowa a young
man by the name Of Samuel Ran
dolph, at that time engaged in teach.
ing country school, and during
leisure hours reading Blackstone in
order to qualify himself for admis.
sion to the bar. Near the school
house lived two farmers, who will be
designated as A and 3. A owned a
large number Of hogs, which he
allowed to run at large to feed on
the mast. B owned a corn6eld,
fenced with dilapidated brush fence.
He also owned savage dog. When
the corn began to ripen, AS hogs
made frequent raids into the field
and helped themselves to the corn.
B being greatly annoyed by them,
finally set his dog on the hogs and
worried them considerably. When
A discovered his laceratedsnogs lie
was full Of wrath. The next day A
started, with an ak on his shoulder,
to go to his timber to chop wood,
which led him by BIS house, and see-
ing BIS wife inside Of BIS lot, about
thirty or forty feet from the fence,
milking cow, he stopped at the
gate and inquired for 3. Being in.
formed that 3 was not at home, be
threatened to smash B to the earth
if he ever dogged his hogs again, and
to demonstrate how he would do it be
brought his ak down on the fence
with a fearful blow. He then left.
When B returned his wife Informed
hin Of AS threat, which made him
madder than a March hare, and of
he goes to the schoolhouse to con.
suit Sam Randolph whether be would
sue A with the law Randolph,
after consulting MS Blackstone and
the statutes, informed linn that the
act constituted the offense of assault
with intent to irfict great bodily in.
jury and advised B to commence q
criminal prosecution against A.
s Randolph drew up an information
and B took it to the nearest justice
and had warrant issued for AS
arrest. a being duly arrested, and a
day set for his trial, Randolph ap-
peared for the prosecution and man
named Jones as attorney for the de.
fendant. The witnesses being sworn,
! the facts as above stated were duly
proven. Randolph then proceeded
with lengthy argument, not to con.
s vince the court Of the defendants
guilt, but to convince the court and
bystanders that he had read Black.
stone, and concluded his argument
with the following perorstion: ''May
it please your honor, the summum
bonum of the whole business is that
the defendant is guilty"
Then Jones, for the defense, ad.
dressed the court as follows: "Your
honor, it may be that under that old
law of summum bonum-which was
that if man was charged with q
he was guilty, whether he had
ever done anything wrong or not
that my client is guilty; but that Law
was an unjust law enacted by despots
and tyrants to Cypress the weak and
the poor. That was the law of this
country down to the time Of the rev.
olutionary war, when our forefathers
rebelled against it, and after seven
long years of bloody war, finally re-
pealed it with their swords and en-
acted in its stead the great law of E
PluriDus Unum, which is that a man
is never guilty of any crime until he
does something wrong. Now, since
prosecutor was not within q mile Of
fence when the blow was struck, be
could not have been injured; and as
blow did the fence no harm, my
client did no wrong. Therefore, un-
der the great law of E Pluribus
Unum, which is now the law of this
country, he is not guilty, and should
be dischaTged.'
& The justice then summed up the
case as follows: "Well, it appears
by the argument that under the old
law OF summum bonus the defendant
is guilty; but my father was revo
lutlonary soldier, aud I've heern
him tell all about the revolutionary
war, and so I know that the old law
OF summum bonus has been abolished,
and the great law of E Pluribus
Unum now waves all over this coun-
try. So l lets the defendant CO.
a CRY OE REVOLT IN IRELAND.